2009 (8) TMI 1055 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Rectification of mistake in the Tribunal's order based on the challenge to a circular issued by CBEC and consideration of judgments cited by the appellant.

Analysis:
The appellants sought rectification of a mistake in the Tribunal's order, claiming that the Tribunal did not consider the judgments cited by them. The learned Consultant argued that the Tribunal merely reiterated the Commissioner (Appeals)'s conclusions and did not discuss the three judgments presented. One of the cited judgments involved the insertion of Explanation V in a notification, affecting the calculation of clearances for exemption eligibility. The Tribunal upheld the department's contention that the amendment should be applied from the insertion date, not retrospectively. Another case cited by the appellant dealt with a similar amendment, emphasizing that exemption notifications typically have prospective, not retrospective, effects. The Tribunal concluded that the appellant's claim lacked merit and rejected the rectification application.

The Tribunal noted that the appellant's arguments were not convincing, as the department did not intend to give retrospective effect to the amendment in question. The decision emphasized that subsequent amendments are not clarificatory in nature and do not impact previous calculations for exemption eligibility. The Tribunal concluded that since the appellant's claim was not valid, there was no need to delve into the clarification issued by the Board. Ultimately, the Tribunal found no merit in the rectification application and dismissed it accordingly.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues surrounding the rectification of the Tribunal's order, the consideration of cited judgments, and the application of amendments to determine exemption eligibility, providing a comprehensive overview of the legal reasoning and conclusions reached by the Tribunal.